Linguistic auto-poetry:An auto-theoretical approach to the multilingual subject’s self/ves and relationship to language(s)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper will explore the contribution auto-reflexive poetry can make to research on multilingualism in literature, or “heterolingualism”, and how heterolingual poetry can be a literary space for expressing the multilingual self/ves. In this regard, I wish to propose a case study of my autobiographical-heterolingual poetry collection, ORCHESTR A.E (AB publishing 2023). This auto-theoretical work addresses my identity as a bilingual person and provides insights into my creative process. My code-switching is motivated not only by lexical differences, but also by how I relate to English and French. I experience languages as more than communicative tools: they are sensory and aesthetic phenomena which elicit various emotions. I am currently working on new bilingual poetry dealing precisely with how I express my feelings and emotions differently in each language. As part of my PhD (The polyglot writer: what multilingual texts reveal about writers’ emotional attachment to the languages they speak), I will draw on existing work from authors such as Suchet and Grutman, Gümüşay and Pavlenko to specify the way polyglot writers identify with the languages they speak, and the cognitive processes behind the choice of language(s) they use in writing. Focusing on auto-reflexive work bears the larger question of whether heterolingual poetry has an inherently autobiographical dimension, a question I aspire to elaborate on as my research advances.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".